Comments on: Oil, Smoke & Mirrors – 9/11 Conspiracy Theory http://onemansblog.com/2007/02/17/oil-smoke-mirrors-911-conspiracy-theory/ Specialization is for Insects. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:56:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Carlos Velez http://onemansblog.com/2007/02/17/oil-smoke-mirrors-911-conspiracy-theory/comment-page-1/#comment-46718 Carlos Velez Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:33:08 +0000 http://onemansblog.com/2007/02/17/oil-smoke-mirrors-911-conspiracy-theory/#comment-46718 "There are some other comments that are truly ridiculous. For example, two of the speakers in the video question why the twin towers actually collapsed because “fires have burned other buildings without them collapsing”. Hello!?! Those buildings didn’t sustain direct impacts from fully fueled massive aircraft traveling 500 MPH!" You seem to be a bit missinformed on this particular segment of the information presented about the collapse of WTC building 1, 2, & 7. According to a documentary about the construction of the WTC they were designed to sustain multiple impacts from jetliners due to a 47 core collums going through the center of the buildings. NYIST Report states the majority of the jet fuel burned up upon impact. Which leaves a small amount of jet fuel burning less than 2 hours to weaken the structure of the buildings so that they could collapse in less than 12 seconds around the speed of free fall into it's own footprint. Extremely improbable. Building 7 was a 42 story building that collapsed in 6.5 seconds it wasn't even hit by a plane. Yet the closer smaller buildings around the towers didn't collapse. The only reason I bring this to your attention is I felt the same way you did about the impact of the planes. It was only after a little bit of research did I discover some details that made little to no sense. One example is the temperature that jet fuel burns compaired to the temperature that steel melts. (they found molten steel at the bottom of all 3 buildings) jet fuel 1700 degrees fh vs steel 2800 degrees fh. Very strange. “There are some other comments that are truly ridiculous. For example, two of the speakers in the video question why the twin towers actually collapsed because “fires have burned other buildings without them collapsing”. Hello!?! Those buildings didn’t sustain direct impacts from fully fueled massive aircraft traveling 500 MPH!”

You seem to be a bit missinformed on this particular segment of the information presented about the collapse of WTC building 1, 2, & 7.
According to a documentary about the construction of the WTC they were designed to sustain multiple impacts from jetliners due to a 47 core collums going through the center of the buildings. NYIST Report states the majority of the jet fuel burned up upon impact. Which leaves a small amount of jet fuel burning less than 2 hours to weaken the structure of the buildings so that they could collapse in less than 12 seconds around the speed of free fall into it’s own footprint. Extremely improbable.

Building 7 was a 42 story building that collapsed in 6.5 seconds it wasn’t even hit by a plane. Yet the closer smaller buildings around the towers didn’t collapse.

The only reason I bring this to your attention is I felt the same way you did about the impact of the planes. It was only after a little bit of research did I discover some details that made little to no sense.
One example is the temperature that jet fuel burns compaired to the temperature that steel melts. (they found molten steel at the bottom of all 3 buildings) jet fuel 1700 degrees fh vs steel 2800 degrees fh. Very strange.

]]>